Open access peer-reviewed chapter - ONLINE FIRST

Epigenetics in Multiple Sclerosis-Related Cognition Impairment

Written By

Amirmohammad Alborzi and Fatemeh Hasani

Submitted: 19 December 2023 Reviewed: 03 January 2024 Published: 13 February 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.114166

Topics in Neurocognition IntechOpen
Topics in Neurocognition Edited by Sandro Misciagna

From the Edited Volume

Topics in Neurocognition [Working Title]

Sandro Misciagna

Chapter metrics overview

15 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory and demyelinating disease that can result in various disabilities, including cognitive impairment. While the myelin sheath is traditionally considered the primary target, the gray matter of the cortex is also affected, contributing to cognitive dysfunction. This study explores the role of epigenetics in understanding the underlying pathological processes of MS and evaluates potential molecular patterns influencing cognition in MS patients. Epigenetics involves processes regulating gene expression in response to environmental stimuli, encompassing changes in DNA, histones, and microRNA without altering the nucleotide sequence. Understanding these epigenetic mechanisms may reveal new avenues for developing therapeutic interventions to manage cognitive dysfunctions in MS. Given the limited available data on the role of epigenetics in cognition in MS patients, this study aims to provide a comprehensive review of the existing literature on this subject.

Keywords

  • multiple sclerosis (MS)
  • cognition
  • epigenetics
  • DNA methylation
  • histone modification
  • microRNA

1. Introduction

Epigenetics, a rapidly advancing scientific field, delves into the impact of environmental factors on genes and how organisms respond by orchestrating gene expression. These essential mechanisms not only play a pivotal role in developmental processes but also contribute to maintaining internal stability, commonly referred to as homeostasis. Organisms utilize these adaptive tools to effectively cope with and adjust to changes in their environment [1]. Epigenetic mechanisms encompass changes to the DNA structure or its associated proteins without modifying the underlying DNA nucleotide sequence. These modifications are often responsive to feedback and can subsequently play a role in either activating or repressing gene expression [2]. Gaining a thorough understanding of the principles of epigenetics and the complexities of its molecular mechanisms can enhance our comprehension of the development and progression of various diseases, including cancers, autoimmune conditions, neurodegenerative disorders, and psychiatric illnesses [3]. Studying epigenetics offers the potential for more effective treatments across diseases. This research focuses on multiple sclerosis (MS), a chronic autoimmune disease affecting young populations, characterized by inflammation and myelin degradation in the central nervous system [4]. Patients exhibit varied clinical presentations depending on the location of lesions in the CNS. Symptoms encompass double vision, blindness, muscle weakness, sensory loss, ataxia, nystagmus, bladder dysfunction, and psychiatric problems [5]. Recent research has brought to light the prominence of cognitive and memory impairment in individuals with MS [6].

While many studies have explored the role of epigenetics in cognition and cognitive issues in MS, evidence linking the two is limited. This study investigates how epigenetic modifications may influence gene expression related to neuroprotection, inflammation, and synaptic plasticity, potentially contributing to cognitive deficits in MS. The goal is to uncover the mechanisms of epigenetic regulation in MS, providing insights into the pathogenesis of cognitive impairments and suggesting avenues for novel therapeutic interventions.

Advertisement

2. Cognition impairment in MS

Cognition impairment is frequently observed in MS, with prevalence rates varying between 43% and 70% at different stages of the disease [7, 8, 9, 10].

Attention is a complex cognitive function that interconnects various processes, including alertness and vigilance. Impairments in attention are observed in an estimated 12–25% of patients with MS [11, 12]. It seems that in MS, the thalamus serves as the central gray matter area vital for attention-related tasks [13]. MS patients often experience challenges in both advanced and basic attention tasks [14]. Factors like the interconnectedness of attention with other cognitive areas, the influence of fatigue, and the variability in MS descriptions across studies can complicate accurate evaluations and conclusions regarding attention impairments [12, 15, 16].

Memory impairment stands out as a prevalent cognitive dysfunction observed in MS patients, with incidence rates ranging from 33% to 65% [11]. Predominantly, disruptions manifest in long-term memory, governing learning and recall functions, and working memory [16]. Despite prolonged discourse on the etiology of memory dysfunction in MS, definitive clarity remains elusive. Initial perspectives posited that deficits in retrieval from long-term storage were accountable for the observed long-term memory impairments, with encoding and storage capacities ostensibly unaffected [17, 18]. However, subsequent investigations advanced the notion that encoding and storage processes’ dysfunction precipitates memory deficits [19, 20]. It has also been revealed that among MS patients, significant impairments in maximum learning, and challenges in recovering from proactive and retroactive semantic interference effects, represent key deficiencies in episodic memory [21].

Visual perceptual functions involve recognizing and appropriately evaluating visual stimuli [16]. Limited research exists on this topic; however, a study by Lopes Costa et al. establishes a significant link between visual processing deficits in MS patients and reduced abilities in detecting visual stimuli, emphasizing a pronounced restriction in visual temporal processing capacity [22].

Advertisement

3. DNA methylation

DNA methylation, a well-studied epigenetic change in MS patients, regulates gene expression by methylating cytosine at the C5 position. DNA methyltransferase enzymes, including de novo types (Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b) and conventional types (Dnmt1), play distinct roles [23]. CpG islands, crucial in mammals, have higher CpG density and are present in about 70% of gene promoters. Methylation in these regions can suppress gene expression, vital for gene imprinting [24]. Studies on DNA methylation and cognition focus on synaptic plasticity, where neurons adapt based on stimuli. Feng and colleagues showed that the absence of Dnmt1 and Dnmt3a enzymes led to defects in hippocampal neuron plasticity, affecting learning and memory. This was achieved through genetic mutations in forebrain excitatory neurons [25].

3.1 DNA methylation in MS-related cognition impairment

Numerous studies have explored the impact of myelin sheath loss on synaptic plasticity and interneuron transmission in MS patients [26]. Pioneering this concept, Dutta and colleagues demonstrated that demyelination in the hippocampal neurons of MS patients suppresses the expression of genes associated with rapid inter-synaptic transmission. Additionally, they observed a reduction in the number of synapses in the demyelinated areas of the hippocampus in these patients [27].

Some studies have noted an increase in methylation and a decrease in demethylation enzymes mRNA during demyelination [28]. Siddiqa et al. focused on the upregulation of AKNA gene mRNA levels after demyelination, which regulates CD40 and CD40 ligands in microglia and macrophage cells. This increase leads to elevated TNF-α expression, contributing to neuronal death. Additionally, it was found that demyelination leads to increased TSS methylation in the WDR81 gene, crucial for neuronal survival, resulting in gene suppression [29, 30].

While there is limited data suggesting a direct link between DNA methylation and cognitive impairment in MS patients, we propose a hypothetical pathway based on our literature review that may be involved in this process.

Our initial hypothesis revolves around the aberrant expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in MS and its potential impact on cognition. BDNF, a vital member of the neurotrophins family, plays a pivotal role in synaptic plasticity, neuronal differentiation, and myelin sheath repair [31]. In MS patients with a more progressive disease course, there is observed hypomethylation and increased expression of BDNF, likely reflecting the neuronal response to tissue damage. Nociti have proposed that the expression level of this gene could serve as a prognostic indicator for disease progression in MS [32].

In a study comparing major depressive disorder patients and a healthy control group, higher BDNF methylation in most gene regions correlated with poorer cognitive performance. However, methylation of CpG site 10 in promoter I improved cognitive function, and CpG site 13 methylation in promoter IV was strongly linked to visual learning and memory [33]. Another study by Bakusic revealed that BDNF hypomethylation of promoter I is involved in anhedonia and impaired reward learning in depressed patients [34]. Shared biological pathways and therapeutic agents between MS and comorbidities suggest exploring common methylated genes like BDNF to uncover shared pathology.

Another hypothesis focuses on LGMN. Responsible for expressing the immune system regulator cysteine protease Legumain, LGMN’s hypomethylation and higher expression were observed in pathology-free areas of MS patients’ brains compared to the control group in the study by Huynh [35]. Additionally, Xia’s study highlights the link between LGMN suppression, increased longevity, and cognitive preservation. Overexpression of LGMN in nematodes led to early signs of cell aging and defects in learning and memory [36]. While the evidence supporting the relationship between LGMN methylation and cognition in MS is not as robust as previous hypotheses, the role of LGMN overexpression in both MS and cognitively impaired patients warrants further investigation.

Advertisement

4. Histone modifications in MS-related cognition impairment

In patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), elevated levels of histone acetylation, transcriptional inhibitors, and histone citrullination are observed. Aberrant citrullination in myelin proteins, particularly myelin basic protein (MBP), contributes to myelin instability and oligodendrocyte apoptosis. Citrullinated MBP is more prevalent in the normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) of MS patients. Increased PADI2 and PADI4 levels in the white matter suggest catalyzed citrullination by these enzymes. Abundant PADI, especially PADI4, in the nucleus of NAWM, justifies aberrant citrullination of H3, leading to the release of the proinflammatory cytokine TNF during demyelination. Histone methylation, occurring on lysine and arginine residues, has variable outcomes depending on the number and position of methyl groups. Some propose histone deacetylase inhibitors for MS treatment, but these may interfere with myelin development and repair. Thus, a more targeted treatment approach is recommended to balance potential benefits on neurons while protecting against detrimental effects on myelin production [37, 38].

Histone modification H3K4me3 plays a significant role in both memory formation and MS. Methylation at different histone sites can have varied effects on transcription, with H3K4me3 associated with increased transcription [2, 39]. Singhal’s study revealed reduced betaine concentration in the cortex of MS patients, correlating with decreased levels of H3K4me3 in neurons. This modification activates the transcription of genes related to the electron transport chain and cell respiration in neurons [40]. Additionally, studies suggest H3K4me3’s potential role in regulating BDNF expression, synaptic plasticity, and learning and memory formation [41]. Morse S.J.’s investigation linked learning with increased BDNF gene transcription and elevated H3K4me3 in the hippocampus, with the reversal of memory impairment in the aged hippocampus [42]. This suggests that dysregulation of baseline methylated histone levels, particularly H3K4me3, may contribute to memory dysfunction in MS patients [43].

A hypothesis can be on the role of H3K9me2, a transcriptional repressive marker, suggesting its involvement in memory impairment in MS patients [44]. H3K9me2 is linked to downregulating genes crucial for memory processes, potentially leading to deficits in memory [42]. SIRT1, involved in histone methylation and deacetylation, may play a role in this process [45]. Studies by Gupta-Agarwal show that increasing H3K9me2 levels in the lateral amygdala improves memory formation [46], while another study reveals elevated H3K9me2 levels in the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex during memory consolidation in rats [47]. These findings underscore the importance of investigating H3K9me2 in understanding memory impairment in MS patients.

Demyelination in MS involves antigen-presenting cells (APCs) presenting antigens to T cells, leading to T helper differentiation and subsequent activation by microglia in the CNS. Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) impact various cells in these pathways, promoting Treg cell function and inhibiting damaging Th1/17 cells [48]. Oligodendrocytes (OLGs) are influenced by HDACi, with more differentiated OLGs experiencing increased histone deacetylation, hindering differentiation, while undifferentiated oligodendrocyte precursor cells (OPCs) exhibit elevated histone acetylation. HDACi affects Tau in myelin, increasing histone acetylation, protecting microglia, and preventing myelin injury. HLA-DR expression, a genetic susceptibility factor in MS, is regulated by HDAC1. Studies in mice show that enhancing histone lysine acetylation through HDACi improves memory, synaptic plasticity, and fear extinction, offering potential therapies for anxiety disorders [49]. Acetylation of histones like H3K9 and H4K5 in young mice after contextual fear conditioning suggests a role in memory function [50]. HDAC2 reduction is implicated in memory and neuronal plasticity contrary to HDAC1, with Sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) [51], a deacetylase, playing a role in gene silencing [52]. Histone acetylation reduction in normal memory decline in the elderly involves transcription factors NF-κB and CREB, regulated by acetylation, with CREB binding protein (CBP) deletion impairing acetylation [50]. Inhibiting histone deacetylation activates BDNF promoter transcription. Jie’s study on rat hippocampal neurons reveals that aberrant H3K9 acetylation impairs synaptic plasticity and spatial memory, while HDAC inhibitors may offer protection against this memory impairment [53].

Advertisement

5. Micro RNAs in MS-related cognitive impairment

MiRNAs, recognized for their endogenous non-coding RNA structure, play a crucial role in posttranscriptional modulation of mRNA expression, influencing various biological processes [54]. These molecules are particularly important in maturation, impacting complex phenomena such as neuronal differentiation, synaptic plasticity, and memory formation [55, 56, 57]. Notably, dysregulation of miRNAs has been observed in neurodegenerative diseases and MS, prompting interest in their potential contribution to cognitive impairment in MS [58, 59]. While specific experimental studies on the impact of microRNAs on cognitive deficits in MS are currently lacking, existing knowledge on the role of epigenetics in MS and memory formation offers valuable insights.

MiR-233, located on the X chromosome, is implicated in contextual memory deficit and MS disease, directing attention to the transcription factor STAT5 and other regulators associated with MS-related inflammatory processes [60, 61, 62]. Fenoglio et al. observed a decrease in miR-223 expression in individuals with MS, correlating with disability and suggesting a potential link to neurodegeneration [63]. Ridolfi et al. documented elevated miR-223 expression in PBMCs, T regulatory cells, blood samples, and active MS lesions compared to controls [64]. Dysregulation of miR-223 is associated with key mechanisms in MS, including focal adhesion, T cell receptor signaling, and neurotrophin signaling [60]. Functioning as a neuroprotective microRNA, miR-223 is involved in contextual memory deficits and regulates neuronal cell death in the CA1 region of the hippocampus following transient global ischemia [65]. Overexpressing miR-223, but not NT-miRNA, reduces neuronal loss after a lethal NMDA insult in hippocampal neurons. Based on these findings, our hypothesis suggests that Mir-223 dysregulation contributes to memory impairment in MS patients.

MiR-9 plays a crucial role in cellular differentiation, exhibiting increased expression during the specialization of embryonic cells [66, 67]. In the context of MS, miR-9 shows upregulation in inactive lesions [68]. Its involvement extends to Parkinson’s disease (PD) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD), where altered expression is observed in patients’ blood serum and cerebrospinal fluid, serving as a reflection of the neurodegenerative disease status [69]. In AD, miR-9 is downregulated in cerebrospinal fluid, exhibiting a correlation with disease progression and neurofibrillary tangle severity (Braak stages) [70]. The dysregulation of miR-9 potentially contributes to the upregulation of neurofilament H and the downregulation of SIRT1, influencing AD pathogenesis [70]. These studies underscore the importance of exploring the role of miR-9 in AD, PD, and MS.

MiR-137, a crucial regulator in brain function, is implicated in MS, AD, and learning memory enhancement [71]. Its dysregulation in MS suggests potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker utility, targeting HDAC9 and CACNA1C in neurodegenerative disorders [72]. In AD, miR-137 negatively regulates SPTLC1, impacting Aβ generation. Epigenetic factors like gender and diet influence miR-137 regulation in sporadic AD development [72]. Reduced miR-137 expression correlates with increased proBDNF translation, affecting synaptic remodeling and memory improvement [73]. Additionally, miR-137 modulates synaptic function at the hippocampal CA3-CA1 synapse by targeting GluA1 [74]. Overall, miR-137 expression changes may contribute to cognitive impairments in AD and MS patients.

MiR-22 displays differential expression in regulatory T cells of individuals with MS compared to healthy controls (HCs) [75], with heightened expression documented within active lesions [68]. It is upregulated in relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and elevated in mice’s spinal cords and peripheral lymphoid organs [76], impacting genes associated with PTEN-mediated signaling pathways [77]. Li et al.’s research highlights miR-22’s specific enrichment in aging brains, where it regulates mitochondrial complex subunits [78]. Additionally, miR-22 exhibits upregulation in active MS lesions, and while CD47-targeting miRNAs may decrease CD47 expression, further investigation is needed to understand their expression in other brain cell types [68].

Advertisement

6. Conclusion

Treating cognitive issues in individuals with MS is an urgent clinical necessity, as the disease’s progression poses significant challenges for patients, and effective treatment methods are currently lacking. The impairment of myelination is a key aspect of MS pathogenesis, and emerging evidence suggests a pivotal role for epigenetic processes in this context. Our comprehensive literature review explores the intricate interplay between epigenetics, cognition, and MS. Despite numerous studies on cognitive dysfunction in MS, a scarcity of data on the specific role of epigenetics and conflicting results characterize the existing literature. In this review, we propose hypotheses regarding potential epigenetic mechanisms contributing to cognitive impairment in MS patients, recognizing the existing gaps in knowledge. To address these limitations, future research should prioritize comprehensive clinical and trial studies, utilizing precise case-control designs, fine sampling, and PCR techniques targeting specific genes within the pathway. A more nuanced understanding of epigenetics holds promise for unveiling novel therapeutic strategies, leveraging cellular and molecular patterns to effectively address cognitive impairments in MS patients.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Professor Sandro Misciagna for their invaluable guidance and supervision throughout the process of writing this chapter. This chapter was not supported by any grant.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1. Moosavi A. Role of epigenetics in biology and human diseases. Iranian Biomedical Journal. 2016;20(5):246-258
  2. 2. Huynh J. Epigenetic mechanisms in multiple sclerosis: Implications for pathogenesis and treatment. The Lancet Neurology. 2013;12(2):195-206
  3. 3. Zoghbi H. Epigenetics and human disease. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology. 2016;8(2)
  4. 4. Doshi A, Chataway J. Multiple sclerosis, a treatable disease. Clinical Medicine (London). Dec 2016;16(Suppl 6):s53-s59. DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.16-6-s53. PMID: 27956442; PMCID: PMC6329568
  5. 5. Lublin F. Clinical features and diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Neurologic Clinics. 2005;23:1-15
  6. 6. Inglese M. Indirect evidence for early widespread gray matter involvement in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. NeuroImage. 2004;21:1825-1829
  7. 7. Benedict RH, Cookfair D, Gavett R, Gunther M, Munschauer F, Garg N, et al. Validity of the minimal assessment of cognitive function in multiple sclerosis (MACFIMS). Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2006;12(4):549-558
  8. 8. Nourbakhsh B, Nunan-Saah J, Maghzi A-H, Julian LJ, Spain R, Jin C, et al. Longitudinal associations between MRI and cognitive changes in very early MS. Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders. 2016;5:47-52
  9. 9. Piras MR, Magnano I, Canu EDG, Paulus KS, Satta WM, Soddu A, et al. Longitudinal study of cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis: Neuropsychological, neuroradiological, and neurophysiological findings. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 2003;74(7):878-885
  10. 10. Peyser JM, Rao SM, LaRocca NG, Kaplan E. Guidelines for neuropsy-chological research in multiple sclerosis. Archives of Neurology. 1990;47(1):94-97
  11. 11. Guimarães J, Sá MJ. Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Frontiers in Neurology. 2012;3:74
  12. 12. Winkelmann A, Engel C, Apel A, Zettl UK. Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neurology. 2007;254:II35-II42
  13. 13. Bisecco A, Stamenova S, Caiazzo G, d’Ambrosio A, Sacco R, Docimo R, et al. Attention and processing speed performance in multiple sclerosis is mostly related to thalamic volume. Brain Imaging and Behavior. 2018;12:20-28
  14. 14. Beatty WW, Goodkin DE, Monson N, Beatty PA. Implicit learning in patients with chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. International Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology. 1990;12(3-4):166-172
  15. 15. Kujala P, Portin R, Revonsuo A, Ruutiainen J. Attention related performance in two cognitively different subgroups of patients with multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 1995;59(1):77-82
  16. 16. Chiaravalloti ND, DeLuca J. Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. The Lancet Neurology. 2008;7(12):1139-1151
  17. 17. Caine ED, Bamford KA, Schiffer RB, Shoulson I, Levy S. A controlled neuropsychological comparison of Huntington's disease and multiple sclerosis. Archives of Neurology. 1986;43(3):249-254
  18. 18. Rao SM. Neuropsychology of multiple sclerosis: A critical review. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 1986;8(5):503-542
  19. 19. DeLuca J, Gaudino EA, Diamond BJ, Christodoulou C, Engel RA. Acquisition and storage deficits in multiple sclerosis. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 1998;20(3):376-390
  20. 20. Thornton AE, Raz N, Tucker KA. Memory in multiple sclerosis: Contextual encoding deficits. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2002;8(3):395-409
  21. 21. Matias-Guiu JA, Cortés-Martínez A, Curiel RE, Delgado-Álvarez A, Fernández-Oliveira A, Pytel V, et al. Memory impairment in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis using a challenging semantic interference task. Frontiers in Neurology. 2020;11
  22. 22. Lopes Costa S, Gonçalves OF, DeLuca J, Chiaravalloti N, Chakravarthi R, Almeida J. The temporal dynamics of visual processing in multiple sclerosis. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult. 2016;23(2):133-140
  23. 23. Moore LD. DNA methylation and its basic function. Neuropsych-opharmacology. 2013;38:23-38
  24. 24. Saxonov S. A genome-wide analysis of CpG dinucleotides in the human genome distinguishes two distinct classes of promoters. PNAS. 2006;103(5):1412-1417
  25. 25. Feng J. Dnmt1 and Dnmt3a maintain DNA methylation and regulate synaptic function in adult forebrain neurons. Nature Neuroscience. 2010;13(4):423-430
  26. 26. Chiaravalloti ND. Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurology. 2008;7(12):1139-1151
  27. 27. Dutta R. Demyelination causes synaptic alterations in hippocampi from multiple sclerosis patients. Annals of Neurology. 2011;69(3):445-454
  28. 28. Chomyk A. DNA methylation in demyelinated multiple sclerosis hippocampus. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1)
  29. 29. Siddiqa A. Regulation of CD40 and CD40 ligand by the AT-hook transcription factor AKNA. Nature. 2001;410:383-387
  30. 30. Traka M. WDR81 is necessary for purkinje and photoreceptor cell survival. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2013;33(16):6834-6844
  31. 31. Huang EJ. Neurotrophins: Roles in neuronal development and function. Annual Review of Neuroscience. 2001;24:677-736
  32. 32. Nociti V. BDNF rs6265 polymorphism methylation in Multiple Sclerosis: A possible marker of disease progression. PLOS ONE. 2019;14(2)
  33. 33. Ferrer A. BDNF genetic variants and methylation: Effects on cognition in major depressive disorder. Translational Psychiatry. 2019;9
  34. 34. Bakusic J. Interplay of Val66Met and BDNF methylation: Effect on reward learning and cognitive performance in major depression. Clinical Epigenetics. 2021;13
  35. 35. Huynh J. Epigenome-wide differences in pathology-free regions of multiple sclerosis-affected brains. Nature Neuroscience. 2014;17(1):121-130
  36. 36. Xia Y. Neuronal C/EBPβ/AEP pathway shortens life span via selective GABAnergic neuronal degeneration by FOXO repression. Science Advances. 2022;8(13)
  37. 37. Kular L, Jagodic M. Epigenetic insights into multiple sclerosis disease progression. Journal of Internal Medicine. 2020;288(1):82-102
  38. 38. Huynh JL, Casaccia P. Epigenetic mechanisms in multiple sclerosis: Implications for pathogenesis and treatment. Lancet Neurology. 2013;12(2):195-206
  39. 39. Webb LM, Guerau-de-Arellano M. Emerging role for methylation in multiple sclerosis: Beyond DNA. Trends in Molecular Medicine. 2017;23(6):546-562
  40. 40. Singhal NK. Changes in methionine metabolism and histone H3 trimethylation are linked to mitochondrial defects in multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neuroscience. 2015;35(45):15170-15186
  41. 41. Miranda M, Morici JF, Zanoni MB, Bekinschtein P. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor: A key molecule for memory in the healthy and the pathological brain. Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience. 2019;13:363
  42. 42. Morse SJ, Butler AA, Davis RL, Soller IJ, Lubin FD. Environmental enrichment reverses histone methylation changes in the aged hippocampus and restores age-related memory deficits. Biology (Basel). 1 Apr 2015;4(2):298-313. DOI: 10.3390/biology4020298. PMID: 25836028; PMCID: PMC4498301
  43. 43. Srivastav S, Walitza S, Grünblatt E. Emerging role of miRNA in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review. ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders. 2018;10:49-63
  44. 44. Rea S. Regulation of chromatin structure by site-specific histone H3 methyltransferases. Nature. 2000;406:593-599
  45. 45. Heo J. Sirt1 regulates DNA methylation and differentiation potential of embryonic stem cells by antagonizing Dnmt3l. Cell Reports. 2017;18(8):1930-1945
  46. 46. Gupta-Agarwal S. NMDA receptor- and ERK-dependent histone methylation changes in the lateral amygdala bidirectionally regulate fear memory formation. Learning & Memory. 2014;21(7):351-362
  47. 47. Gupta-Agarwal S. G9a/GLP histone lysine Dimethyltransferase complex activity in the hippocampus and the entorhinal cortex is required for gene activation and silencing during memory consolidation. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2012;32(16):5440-5453
  48. 48. LoPresti P. HDAC6 in diseases of cognition and of neurons. Cells. 2020;10(1)
  49. 49. Hait NC, Wise LE, Allegood JC, O'Brien M, Avni D, Reeves TM, et al. Active, phosphorylated fingolimod inhibits histone deacetylases and facilitates fear extinction memory. Nature Neuroscience. 2014;17(7):971-980
  50. 50. Peixoto L, Abel T. The role of histone acetylation in memory formation and cognitive impairments. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013;38(1):62-76
  51. 51. Hewes D, Tatomir A, Kruszewski AM, Rao G, Tegla CA, Ciriello J, et al. SIRT1 as a potential biomarker of response to treatment with glatiramer acetate in multiple sclerosis. Experimental and Molecular Pathology. 2017;102(2):191-197
  52. 52. Tegla CA. SIRT1 is decreased during relapses in patients with multiple sclerosis. Experimental and Molecular Pathology. 2014;96(2):139-148
  53. 53. Jie J. Memory impairment induced by Borna disease virus 1 infection is associated with reduced H3K9 acetylation. Cellular Physiology and Biochemistry. 2018;49(1):381-394
  54. 54. He L, Hannon GJ. MicroRNAs: Small RNAs with a big role in gene regulation. Nature Reviews. Genetics. 2004;5(7):522-531
  55. 55. O'Brien J, Hayder H, Zayed Y, Peng C. Overview of MicroRNA biogenesis, mechanisms of actions, and circulation. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2018;9
  56. 56. Sempere LF, Freemantle S, Pitha-Rowe I, Moss E, Dmitrovsky E, Ambros V. Expression profiling of mammalian microRNAs uncovers a subset of brain-expressed microRNAs with possible roles in murine and human neuronal differentiation. Genome Biology. 2004;5(3):R13
  57. 57. Duffy CP, McCoy CE. The role of microRNAs in repair processes in multiple sclerosis. Cells. 2020;9(7)
  58. 58. Juźwik CA, Drake SS, Zhang Y, Paradis-Isler N, Sylvester A, Amar-Zifkin A, et al. microRNA dysregulation in neurodegenerative diseases: A systematic review. Progress in Neurobiology. 2019;182:101664
  59. 59. Jongen PJ, Ter Horst AT, Brands AM. Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Minerva Medica. 2012;103(2):73-96
  60. 60. Ebrahimkhani S, Vafaee F, Young PE, Hur SS, Hawke S, Devenney E, et al. Exosomal microRNA signatures in multiple sclerosis reflect disease status. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1):14293
  61. 61. Aziz F. The emerging role of miR-223 as novel potential diagnostic and therapeutic target for inflammatory disorders. Cellular Immunology. 2016;303:1-6
  62. 62. Nicholas R, Rashid W. Multiple sclerosis. American Family Physician. 2013;87(10):712-714
  63. 63. Fenoglio C, Ridolfi E, Cantoni C, De Riz M, Bonsi R, Serpente M, et al. Decreased circulating miRNA levels in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2013;19(14):1938-1942
  64. 64. Ridolfi E, Fenoglio C, Cantoni C, Calvi A, De Riz M, Pietroboni A, et al. Expression and genetic analysis of microRNAs involved in multiple sclerosis. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2013;14(3):4375-4384
  65. 65. Harraz MM, Eacker SM, Wang X, Dawson TM, Dawson VL. MicroRNA-223 is neuroprotective by targeting glutamate receptors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2012;109(46):18962-18967
  66. 66. Joglekar MV, Joglekar VM, Hardikar AA. Expression of islet-specific microRNAs during human pancreatic development. Gene Expression Patterns. 2009;9(2):109-113
  67. 67. Krichevsky AM, Sonntag KC, Isacson O, Kosik KS. Specific microRNAs modulate embryonic stem cell-derived neurogenesis. Stem Cells. 2006;24(4):857-864
  68. 68. Junker A, Krumbholz M, Eisele S, Mohan H, Augstein F, Bittner R, et al. MicroRNA profiling of multiple sclerosis lesions identifies modulators of the regulatory protein CD47. Brain. 2009;132(Pt 12):3342-3352
  69. 69. Blount GS, Coursey L, Kocerha J. MicroRNA networks in cognition and dementia. Cells. 2022;11(12)
  70. 70. Geekiyanage H, Chan C. MicroRNA-137/181c regulates serine palmitoyltransferase and in turn amyloid β, novel targets in sporadic Alzheimer's disease. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2011;31(41):14820-14830
  71. 71. Sun G, Ye P, Murai K, Lang MF, Li S, Zhang H, et al. miR-137 forms a regulatory loop with nuclear receptor TLX and LSD1 in neural stem cells. Nature Communications. 2011;2:529
  72. 72. Ehya F, Tehrani HA, Garshasbi M, Nabavi SM. Identification of miR-24 and miR-137 as novel candidate multiple sclerosis miRNA biomarkers using multi-staged data analysis protocol. Molecular Biology Research Communications. 2017;6(3):127
  73. 73. Konopka W, Kiryk A, Novak M, Herwerth M, Parkitna JR, Wawrzyniak M, et al. MicroRNA loss enhances learning and memory in mice. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2010;30(44):14835-14842
  74. 74. Olde Loohuis NF, Ba W, Stoerchel PH, Kos A, Jager A, Schratt G, et al. MicroRNA-137 controls AMPA-receptor-mediated transmission and mGluR-dependent LTD. Cell Reports. 2015;11(12):1876-1884
  75. 75. De Santis G, Ferracin M, Biondani A, Caniatti L, Rosaria Tola M, Castellazzi M, et al. Altered miRNA expression in T regulatory cells in course of multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neuroimmunology. 2010;226(1-2):165-171
  76. 76. Gandhi R, Healy B, Gholipour T, Egorova S, Musallam A, Hussain MS, et al. Circulating microRNAs as biomarkers for disease staging in multiple sclerosis. Annals of Neurology. 2013;73(6):729-740
  77. 77. Wang L, Rong Q , Zhang Z, Han Z, Yao C, Hou G, et al. The MicroRNA miR-22 represses Th17 cell pathogenicity by targeting PTEN-regulated pathways. ImmunoHorizons. 2020;4:308-318
  78. 78. Li N, Bates DJ, An J, Terry DA, Wang E. Up-regulation of key microRNAs, and inverse down-regulation of their predicted oxidative phosphorylation target genes, during aging in mouse brain. Neurobiology of Aging. 2011;32(5):944-955

Written By

Amirmohammad Alborzi and Fatemeh Hasani

Submitted: 19 December 2023 Reviewed: 03 January 2024 Published: 13 February 2024